Re: separating gdb & inferior output

[Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>]

On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 10:00:11PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:11:47 -0400
> > From: Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>
> > 
> > I have the feeling the tty command does not port properly everywhere
> > that GDB does (mingw, cygwin). I've personally had problems with it on
> > some version of Windows with cygwin. Besides, figuring out how to open a
> > tty on different machines is a real pain.
> > 
> > Is there a better, more portable way, to accomplish the same task?
> 
> What can be more portable than file descriptor redirection?  Even
> MS-DOS supports it.
> 
> > I was thinking of having GDB output it's output to a UNIX or TCP/IP
> > port. How about a FIFO(portable?)? Any other ideas? 
> 
> Both are less portable than redirection, IMHO.  FIFOs are
> Unix-specific, and ports will not work on a system without a network
> interface.
> 
> Perhaps you could state what are the problems with `tty'?

O, you need to actually get a new tty. Windows doesn't have the concept
of a tty. File descriptor redirection is fine. Maybe we could have
something like

   gdb --i=mi --out_fd=n
where n is the descriptor you plan on reading from GDB.

What does it mean to open a 'tty' on a windows platform, or some other
non-unix platform?

Thanks,
Bob Rossi